Did NASA Destroy The Face On Mars??

reply to post by mikesingh

Interesting and thought provocing questions.
I've seen many of these photos treated with filters and the like, but one thing is starkly obvious: the proportions of the face have never been as recognisable as the Viking Images!
I say why not!
Its obvious also, that the existence of the UFO/ET phenomonen has been swept under the carpet for so long; there must be a reason.

I ask you Mike, what do you think of the correlation between the "wipe-out" of the Phobos 2 probe, and your hypothesis here?
Is it possible that both of these incidents happened around the same time?

I would have destroyed it.

Probably a Mars Quake.

-Nasa always said it was an anomaly, people see what is familiar to them.

-Give something enough curves and features, and it will resemble something familiar to the minds eye.

the face is hollow inside??????

reply to post by mystiq


impossible you say picture link it happens on earth , why not on mars too

reply to post by ignorant_ape

And what proof do we have that the face you linked to, on Earth, is natural? The logic that because-it's-on-Earth-it-must-be-natural, is untenable. May be sculpted? By whom is the million dollar question!

Cheers!

reply to post by mikesingh


Hi Mke had a question that maybe you missed:

I ask you Mike, what do you think of the correlation between the "wipe-out" of the Phobos 2 probe, and your hypothesis here? Is it possible that both of these incidents happened around the same time?

Was wondering what are your thoughts on this?

reply to post by mikesingh


You really are playing it for laughs aren't you?

Hey mike, why not go one step further and say rather than a 'satellite we sent, why not say it was an operation performed by our ultra secret space fleet that flys around back and forth between Earth, our colonies in space and god knows where? Theres more 'evidence' for this space fleet (read that as a lot of people want to believe in it) than there is for the face on mars being anything other than a geological formation (in my opinion).

I look forward to your next proposition whereby it was actually done by a bunch of aliens themselves because they didn't want us finding out the truth. Which makes as much sense as us sending a nuke to destroy the cat they already let out of the bag. Afterall, it still doesn't make sense to run such a ludicrous operation that in the end is counter-productive as, if it held any water, it would lead to many questions, just like this thread.

Hey, heres an idea for your next thread, 'Did the hand of god reach down from the sky and smoosh one side of the face on Mars to hide the truth?' ...

Originally posted by KRISKALI777
I ask you Mike, what do you think of the correlation between the "wipe-out" of the Phobos 2 probe, and your hypothesis here? Is it possible that both of these incidents happened around the same time?
Was wondering what are your thoughts on this?

Well, KRIS, here is an image of the cylindrical object photographed by Phobos II:



and another one...


Strange cigar shaped object above Mars.
Pic taken by the Russian Phobos II above Mars
Courtesy Filers Files #01

Phobos II operated nominally throughout its cruise and Mars orbital insertion phases. However, during the final phase of the mission, when the spacecraft was to approach within 50 m of Phobos' surface and release two landers, one a mobile 'hopper', the other a stationary platform, contact with Phobos II was suddenly lost. The mission ended when the spacecraft signal failed to be successfully reacquired on 27 March 1989.


Where the connection between the 'destruction' of the space craft Phobos II is concerned, the mystery object near the Moon and the hypothesis here, I don't think there is one. Contact with the Mars Observer was lost on August 21, 1993, whereas Phobos II was lost on 27th March 1989, over four years earlier.

Cheers!

reply to post by mikesingh


NASA has even gone so far as to blame the Mars Moon Phobos for that elongated shadow.

This is the shadow that NASA has alleged to belong to Phobos - and which is often used to explain away the extremely elongated shadow seen in the second image you just posted.

*Of Course, the debunkers always ignore the direction of travel of the two shadows...



[edit on 31-5-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by mikesingh


When in your estimates do you propose that this damage has occured to the face?
Is there a particular event or nasa mission that you feel may have launched the means to be able to complete this task?
I was wondering if the damage may have occured around the same time as the phobos incident.

reply to post by KRISKALI777

As I mentioned in the OP, contact with the Mars Observer was lost three days before scheduled orbit insertion and was never re-established. This happened on August 21, 1993. That's when this 'incident' took place.

It was speculated that there may have been an explosion in a propellant line during pressurization procedures just before the orbital insertion engine burn. It is believed that hypergolic fuel may have leaked past valves in the system during cruise to Mars, allowing the fuel and oxidizer to combine prematurely before reaching the combustion chamber. The engine was derived from that of an Earth orbital satellite and was not designed to lie dormant for months before being fired.

And as I had said earlier, was there a huge explosion of the highly volatile hypergolic fuel on board resulting in the partial destruction of the face or was it done on purpose? Or could there have been a secret payload of a low yield nuke device on board too?

Published: 24 Sept 2007 21:40:42

There are a few people in the world, who with endless imagination and creativity in union with massive resources and high technology have been playing “God” and secretly experimenting with changing the makeup of our solar system.

Cheers!

reply to post by Exuberant1

So the 'experts' contend that the elongated shadow on Mars is that of Phobos?? I think I need to go back to school. I must have missed out something. I mean can an object like Phobos produce an elongated shadow shaped like a cigar on the surface of Mars? This is Phobos....


Courtesy: ESA

Considering the shape of Phobos, I would think its shadow cannot be cigar shaped! Period!

Cheers!

Originally posted by mikesingh

I must have missed out something.

Internos covered it in December....

This post here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

*Internos.....

reply to post by Exuberant1

Ah thanks! But is this a shadow of Phobos too?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/95e5e4570ebd.jpg[/atsimg]

Strange for it to be casting these elongated shadows on Mars!

Cheers!

reply to post by Majorion


No 3D images for this, I don't have any stereo pair to do it, although I think Mars Express has them.

reply to post by mikesingh


It is very strange.

I am also suspicious of the explanation NASA gave to account for the 2005 image.

I am often suspicious of NASA; their actions are often suspect.

Edit: I wonder if the shadow was moving the same direction in both instances?

[edit on 31-5-2009 by Exuberant1]

POINT OF VIEW:






Taymour

[edit on 31-5-2009 by Taymour]

POINT OF VIEW:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fa90ad03f628.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dba7cac5c327.jpg[/atsimg]

Taymour

Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

Ah thanks! But is this a shadow of Phobos too?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/95e5e4570ebd.jpg[/atsimg]

Strange for it to be casting these elongated shadows on Mars!

Cheers!

an elongated shadow could be caused by Phobos & the sun being very low on the horizon like during sunset. i think the left side of the picture is "night" already while the right side is still "day". your picture doesn't show the scale but I'd assume the shadow is tens or even hundreds of miles long.

if you project a round shadow at the edge of a curved surface you'll get an elongated shadow. you can try that at home with anything that's round and a light that simulates the sun

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
Wouldn't it be easier simply to distort the images public gets to see? Powerful explosion on Mars could be noticed by astronomers. Also other nations have to be part of this operation anyway. So it would be much easier to damage info flow to masses, not origin of information. Especially if it is really ancient non-human civilization, i am sure that guys in NASA would be drooling about plundering it, not nuking it.
Now as for Martian canals and NASA filling it back with sand so public would not suspect - this is different story .....

Yeah, i agree...but your assuming that they haven't already
plundered it..